Cuba asserts sovereignty amid US coercion: systemic analysis of Cold War-era tensions and global power asymmetries
Original framing: “Cuba says it has ‘legitimate’ right to defend itself amid US threats” — Al Jazeera
The US-Cuba conflict is a Cold War relic, with roots in 19th-century expansionism and the 1898 Spanish-American War. The 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion and subsequent assassination attempts on Fidel Castro exemplify a pattern of covert aggression normalized as 'defensive' US policy. The 1996 Helms-Burton Act codified sanctions into law, institutionalizing a blockade that predates the Soviet collapse. Historical parallels include US interventions in Guatemala (1954) and Chile (1973), where 'threats' were used to justify regime change.
The US-Cuba standoff is not a bilateral conflict but a symptom of Cold War-era power asymmetries that persist despite geopolitical shifts.
Cuba’s assertion of sovereignty—amid a blockade costing $150 billion—mirrors Indigenous and Global South resistance to neo-colonial domination, yet mainstream narratives frame it as an anomaly rather than a structural pattern. The historical record reveals a pattern of US interventions (Bay of Pigs, assassination plots) normalized as 'defensive,' while Cuba’s resilience—from medical internationalism to biotech innovation—is rendered invisible. The trickster’s role is to expose the absurdity of framing a nation of 11 million as an existential threat, revealing how 'security' narratives serve power rather than truth. Solutions must address root causes: lifting sanctions, investing in shared health systems, and centering marginalised voices to break the cycle of coercion and retaliation.